Opinion
Civil Action 2:21-CV-00191
03-30-2022
DANIEL ADAME, Plaintiff, v. PETSMART LLC, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION TO REMAND THIS CASE TO STATE COURT
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On March 15, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby issued a “Memorandum and Recommendation to Remand this Case to State Court” (M&R, D.E. 19). The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's M&R. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No. objections have been timely filed.
When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's M&R is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's M&R. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge's M&R (D.E. 19), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Strike (D.E. 17) is DENIED, Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (D.E. 11) is GRANTED. Consequently, the Unopposed Motion to Amend Scheduling Order is DENIED as moot. This action is REMANDED to the County Court at Law No. 4 of Nueces County, Texas.